columnstores non relational?
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:36:41 +0200
Message-ID: <46e0f150$0$238$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
I couldn't read the article (site was down) which is supposed to claim that RDBMSs "should be considered legacy technology."; I don't see how the storage stategy necessarily affects the relationalness of a DBMS. Nice reads anyway: http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/06/1527258 http://www.databasecolumn.com/2007/09/one-size-fits-all.html
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:36:41 +0200
Message-ID: <46e0f150$0$238$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
I couldn't read the article (site was down) which is supposed to claim that RDBMSs "should be considered legacy technology."; I don't see how the storage stategy necessarily affects the relationalness of a DBMS. Nice reads anyway: http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/06/1527258 http://www.databasecolumn.com/2007/09/one-size-fits-all.html
A free columnstore dbms in motion:
http://monetdb.cwi.nl/
Received on Fri Sep 07 2007 - 08:36:41 CEST